Potential of Silty Clay Soil as an Attenuation Material ... · Somnath Mukherjee and Sudipta Ghosh are with the Civil Engineering Department, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, West Bengal,

Abstract—Use of compacted silty clay soil collected from the

Gangetic river sediment near Kolkata, West Bengal, India has

been experimentally explored in the laboratory as a low cost

landfill liner material for retarding the migration of phenolic

compounds releasing from a coke oven wastewater outfall site in

Durgapur, West Bengal, India. The phenol concentration in the

wastewater was found in the range of 4.0-12.0 mg/L in different

times of a calendar year. Batch adsorption results reveal that the

maximum phenol removal efficiency of 95% was achieved at an

initial phenol concentration of 4 mg/L for the soil dose of 20 g/L,

solution pH of 6.0 and after a reaction time of 24 h. Index

properties, swelling potential, compaction characteristics and

permeability of the soil indicate that it is low compressible,

moderately expansive and low permeable (1.90×10-8 cm/s) and

having reasonably good phenol attenuation capacity (472.5

mg/g). These favorable findings suggest that the compacted clay

soil can be potentially utilized as primary landfill liner material

for containment of phenolic waste generated from coke oven

wastewater.

Index Terms—Attenuation, clayey soil, landfill liner, phenol.

I. INTRODUCTION

Compacted clay soils are widely used as a primary landfill

liner for containment of hazardous and toxic waste in the

waste dumping sites [1]-[3]. The containment facility in its

simplest form consists of a clay liner, a cover and the waste

[4]. Locally available natural clays can prove economical

liner material provided it satisfies the standard specifications

for design and construction of new waste containment

structures [5]-[8]. The leakage from a landfill liner may cause

lithosphere pollution due to migration of toxic leachates from

the dumping waste and thereby pronounced severe adverse

impact on the environment. The clay liner should not only

have good contaminant attenuative potential, but also it

should possess low permeability (≤1×10-7

cm/s),

compressibility and have adequate shear strength to resist

bearing capacity and slope failure [5], [9], [10].

In the present work, laboratory studies were conducted to

explore whether a typical silty clay soil obtained from the

Gangetic river bed sediments near Kolkata, West Bengal,

India can be utilized as landfill liner material. Typical tests

Manuscript received September 29, 2014; revised March 2, 2015.

Supriya Pal is with the Civil Engineering Department, National Institute

of Technology Durgapur, West Bengal, India (e-mail:

[email protected]).

Kalyan Adhikari is with the Department of Earth and Environmental

Studies, National Institute of Technology Durgapur, West Bengal, India

(e-mail: [email protected]).

Somnath Mukherjee and Sudipta Ghosh are with the Civil Engineering

Department, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, West Bengal, India (e-mail:

[email protected], [email protected]).

generally used to assess the physico-chemical properties such

as grain size distribution, Atterberg limits, swelling potential,

permeability, triaxial shear strength, compaction

characteristics etc. were conducted and analyzed for using it

as liner material in waste containment structures.

II. MATERIALS AND METHODS

A. Study Area

The outfall or effluent discharge site of coke-oven

wastewater from a steel plant industry in Waria (Fig. 1),

Durgapur, west Bengal, India was considered as an

experimental study area in the present investigation.

Durgapur is known to be the industrial city of the state of

West Bengal. The effluent is discharged in an unlined pit

connected with a narrow drain which meets a natural storm

water drain at a distance of approximately 100 m in the

northwest. The storm water drain finally meets the Damodar

River in the south. Most of the flow of the drain connected to

the pit has been deliberately diverted to the open field for

collection of suspended coal particles by the local people.

This practice has rendered the groundwater of this zone more

vulnerable due to stagnation of effluents covering a large

surface area and permeable nature of the soil.

Fig. 1. Location of groundwater quality sampling stations. 'GW' stands for

sampling points.

B. Characterization of Groundwater and Wastewater in

Outlet Pool near Coke-Oven Wastewater Discharge Site

Groundwater and pit wastewater samples from coke-oven

wastewater discharge site were collected at different times

and tested according to 'Standard Methods' [11] for

Potential of Silty Clay Soil as an Attenuation Material for

Containment of Phenolic Wastewater Outfall Site

Supriya Pal, Kalyan Adhikari, Somnath Mukherjee, and Sudipta Ghosh

International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 6, No. 12, December 2015

895DOI: 10.7763/IJESD.2015.V6.718

mailto:[email protected]

determination of different physicochemical parameters. An

earlier study in this regard was carried out by the authors, and

the existence of phenolic compound both in soil and

groundwater was noticed in appreciable value which is high

above the permissible limit [12]. The waste water from the

discharge pool at the disposal site was found to contain

4.0-12.0 mg/L of phenol concentration after analyzing 20 nos.

of samples at different times in a calendar year. The

groundwater also had high concentration of phenol (1.25

mg/L) in the nearby area which exceeded the maximum

permissible limit of phenol in drinking water is 0.002 mg/L

[13].

Due to this alarming level of phenolic concentration in the

open discharge area, phenol was used as a test contaminant in

the present study.

C. Soil as Liner Material

The soil samples were collected from a soil quarry located

in the Gangetic river bed sediments near Kolkata, West

Bengal, India for exploring its potential of attenuation

capacity against phenol movement from the effluent discharge

site and furthermore to be used as liner material in the waste

containment structure. The samples were brought to the Soil

Mechanics and Foundation Engineering Laboratory of

National Institute of Technology, Durgapur, West Bengal,

India for determining the physico-chemical properties as per

the guidelines given in Bureau of Indian Standards [14]-[21].

First, the soil was oven-dried at 100±200C temperatures for

24h for evaporating out the moisture content in it to dryness

and then it was stored in desiccators until use. Some of the

important soil parameters such as specific gravity, bulk

density, grain size distribution, Atterberg limits, permeability,

shear strength parameters, swelling potential, compaction

characteristics, organic carbon content etc. were determined.

The grain size distribution of soil was determined by

hydrometer (Make-Testing Instruments Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd.,

India) and sieve analyses (Make- Geologists Syndicate Pvt.

Ltd., India). The specific gravity, natural moisture content,

liquid limit, and pH of soil was measured by pycnometer

(Make-Testing Instruments Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd., India), Digital

moisture meter (Model M-3A, make-Advance Research

Instruments Co., India), Casagrande apparatus (Make-Aimil

Ltd., India), and Digital pH meter (Model-pH 1100,

make-EUTECH, Singapore), respectively.

Phenol was estimated by acid digestion of the soil sample

with 1:9 phosphoric acid and aliquot was filtered followed by

spectrometric analysis. No background phenol was traced in

the soil samples that were used as liner material in the present

study. The permeability of the soils were determined by

falling head permeameter using following Eq. 1:

110

2

2.303 logS

haLK

At h (1)

where KS is the permeability (cm/s), a is the cross sectional

area of the stand pipe fitted over the permeameter (cm2), L is

the length of the standpipe of the soil sample (cm), A is the

total cross sectional area of the soil sample (cm2), t is time

(sec), h1 and h2 are the head of water in cm in the stand pipe at

two chosen time intervals t1 and t2.

D. Triaxial Shear Test

Triaxial shear test was conducted on the soil specimens

prepared by molding the soil to a dry density, ρd=15.2 kN/m3

and moisture content, w=19%, which match the optimum

condition of the studied soil. The test was conducted as per

protocol laid down in code of practices of the Bureau of

Indian Standard [22]. Consolidated undrained (CU) triaxial

shear test were performed using four replicate samples under

four confining pressures of 50, 100, 150 and 200 kN/m2

respectively. The applied ratio of shear was 1.0 mm/min. To

ensure repeatability of test results, the test was conducted in

duplicate and average of the replicate test results was

considered as the representative value of the shear strength

parameters (cohesion, c and angle of internal friction, φ) of

the soil.

E. Vertical Swelling Test

The vertical swelling test was conducted on the remolded

soil specimen at maximum dry density and optimum moisture

content stated above. The soil specimen was inundated in the

odeometer apparatus and allowed to swell vertically at a

seating pressure of 1kN/m2 as per the procedure described in

the 'Standard Method' [23]. The test was conducted in

duplicate with replicate samples and average value of the two

test results was taken as the representative swell potential

value. The amount of vertical swelling was calculated based

on the following Eq. 2.

2 1

1

100

L L

SL

(2)

where, S=percentage vertical swelling, L1=initial height of the

soil sample in mm before application of water in odeometer,

L2=final height of sample in mm after it had been allowed to

swell in presence of water for 48 h.

F. Batch Adsorption Studies

The batch adsorption tests were carried out by varying the

adsorbate (phenol) concentrations at desired initial pH with a

fixed amount of adsorbent. In this test, a 100-ml water sample

containing desired concentrations of synthetically prepared

phenol and 0.2 g of soil was kept in 250 ml capacity conical

flasks and stirred for 24 h in an orbital shaker at a speed of 150

rpm. The supernatant solutions were filtered by Whatman 42

filter paper, and the residual phenol concentrations in the

supernatant solutions were analyzed to calculate the amount

of phenol retained in the solid phase, qe (mg/g) by using the

following Eq. 3.

0( )

e

e

c c Vq

M

(3)

where C0 and Ce are the initial and equilibrium concentration

of phenol in mg/L, V=volume of solution in ml, M=mass of

adsorbent in grams.

G. Analysis of Phenol

The phenol concentrations in water were determined in

accordance with Standard Methods [11]. The residual phenol

concentrations were determined spectrophotometrically after

developing color using 0.3 ml each of potassium ferricyanide

and 4-amino antipyrine solution. The solution was then


896

allowed to stand for 10-15 min for full color development.

The concentrations of phenol were measured by UV-visible

spectrophotometer at a wavelength of 500 nm in a 5 cm cell.

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

A. Soil Quality

The soil characteristic parameters are exhibited in Table I.

The grain size distribution shows that the soil contains 41%

clay fraction (<0.002 mm), with 40% silt (0.002 to 0,075 mm)

and 19% sand (0.075 to 0.6 mm). The Atterberg limits of the

soil were: liquid limit (LL), 39.32%; plastic limit (PL),

25.11%; the plasticity index (PI=LL-PL), 14.21%. The soil

can be classified as CI (inorganic clay with intermediate

plasticity) [24]. The shrinkage limit (Atterberg limit) of the

soil found 20.67% from the laboratory test. This high

shrinkage limit (12% or more) value of the clay soil will

reduce the shrinkage potential during the dry season and

thereby minimizing the undesirable desiccation crack within

the clay liner [25], [26]. The activity (the ratio of PI to the

percent by weight of soil particles of diameter smaller than

0.002 mm) of the soil is about 0.35. The soil can be classified

as inactive (activity<0.75) [27]. The soils with higher activity

pronounced undesirable behavior such as higher

compressibility, swelling and shrinkage characteristics and

more likely affected by contaminants if used as liner materials

in containment structures [27], [28].

However, literatures depict that soil with following index

properties: percentage of clay (fraction smaller than 0.002

mm)≥20 to 25 %, percentage of fines (fraction smaller than

0.075 mm)≥50 %, plasticity index (PI)≥12 to 15 % and

activity≥0.3 may be considered as landfill liner materials in

waste containment structures [26], [29], [30]. Based on the

above criteria, it is observed that the studied soil complied the

standards and requirements for using as landfill liner material.

TABLE I: PHYSICO-CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOIL USED IN THE STUDY

Physical properties Clay soil

Specific gravity 2.34

Natural moisture content (%) 32.23

Bulk density (kN/m3) 14.1

Liquid limit (%) 39.32

Plastic limit (%) 25.11

Plasticity Index (%) 14.21

Activity, Ac 0.35

Shrinkage Limit (%) 20.67

pH 5.3

Maximum dry density (kN/m3) 15.2

Optimum moisture content (%) 19

Permeability (cm/s) 1.90× 10-8

Organic carbon (%) 3.65

Sand (%) 19

Silt (%) 40

Clay (%) 41

Vertical swelling (%) 6.26

B. Permeability Values of Laboratory Compacted Soil

Samples

The results of dry density and permeability values of the

soil sample at different water contents are shown graphically

in Fig. 2. The maximum dry density of about 15.2 kN/m3 was

achieved at 19% water content. The dry density continues to

increase in the soil specimen till the optimum moisture

content was reached. The lubrication affect around the soil

particles with the increment of water content makes them

closure into a denser configuration, resulting in a higher dry

density. At the optimum moisture content (OMC), the

lubrication effect is the maximum. With further increase in

water content, the dry density decreases as the water starts to

replace the soil particles and density of water (γw) is less than

the density of solid (γs). From Fig. 2, it is observed that the

permeability value decreases sharply with increase in water

content on the dry side of the optimum. However, the lowest

permeability of the compacted clay occurs at water content

slightly (2%) wet side of the optimum water content (19%).

Further increment of water content, slight increase in

permeability is observed, but it always remains smaller than

dry side of the optimum. The sharp decrease in permeability

in dry side of the optimum with increase of water content was

due to reorientation of soil particles and reduction of size of

voids [30]-[32]. The compacted clay should have

permeability at least 1×10-7

cm/s for using as liner material

[1], [33]. The present soil met the permeability criterion on

both dry and wet sides of the optimum water content.

However, during construction of liner, the compaction of soil

at water content wet side of optimum is not recommended

because of other associated problems of slope instability

caused by lower shear strength of the soil and operational

problems with construction equipments on soft weak soil

[25].

13

13.5

14

14.5

15

15.5

6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

Molding water content (%)

Dry u

nit

weig

ht,

(k

N/m

3)

0.00E+00

2.00E-07

4.00E-07

6.00E-07

8.00E-07

1.00E-06

Perm

eab

ilit

y, k

s (

cm

/s)

Compaction test

Permeability test

Fig. 2. Influence on permeability of the soil at different water content under

Standard Proctor energy.

C. Swelling Potential

The vertical swelling potential of the clay soil was about

6.26 %. The swelling potential of the studied soil was low to

moderate [25]. High swelling clays suffer from differential

settlements and crack on drying. The cracks on liner surface

leads to migration of contaminants into the soils and

groundwater and thereby hampering the desired functions of

liner systems [26], [34]. Therefore, the present soil with low

swelling potential are found suitable for the construction of

liners in containment structures.

D. Shear Strength

The liner materials should have adequate shear strength for

maintaining the stability of the side slopes and also have safe

bearing capacity against base shear failure [5]. The results of

the shear strength parameters obtained from triaxial shear test


897

for the studied soil are given in Table II and Fig. 3.

y = 0.2063x + 215.62

0

100

200

300

400

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

(σ'1+σ

'3)/2, kN/m

2

(σ' 1

-σ' 3

)/2

, k

N/m

2

ψ'

d'

Fig. 3. Failure envelope of the soil in the CU triaxial shear test.

TABLE II: SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS FOR THE SOIL

Cohesion C (kN/m2) Friction angle φ (deg)

220 12

According to Lambe [35], the slope ψ' and intercept d' in

Fig. 3 are related to c' and φ' through Eq. 4.

Sin φ'= tan ψ' (4a)

and

c s

dc

o (4b)

The shear strength of the soil was calculated based on

following Eq. 5.

τf= c' + σ tan φ' (5)

where, σ=overburden pressure (kN/m2) of waste materials at

the top of the soil liner, τf = shear strength of soil at failure

(kN/m2).

σ = γwasted (6)

where, γwaste=average unit weight of the waste material in

kN/m3 and d=depth of waste materials above the top of the

soil liner.

The shear strength of the remolded soil compacted at

maximum dry density and optimum water content was found

to vary with depth below ground surface as exhibited in Table

III.

TABLE III: VARIATION OF SHEAR STRENGTH OF THE LINER DEPENDING

UPON WASTE OVERBURDEN PRESSURE (ASSUMING UNIT WEIGHT OF

WASTEWATER =10 KN/M3)

Depth of waste above

the soil liner (m)

Overburden pressure

(kN/m2)

Shear strength

(kN/m2)

1 10 222.12

2 20 224.25

3 30 226.37

Daniel and Wu [29] reported that the soil used as liner

should have minimum shear strength of 200 kN/m2. Test

results (Table III) show that the soil possesses higher shear

strength than the recommended minimum shear strength for

any depth below surface.

E. Batch Adsorption Studies

The batch adsorption results depicting the percentage

removal of phenol against different initial concentrations of

phenol solution and soil as adsorbent medium for a contact

time of 24 h are shown graphically in Fig. 4. The pH of the

soil solution mixtures were maintained at 6.0. Literatures

reported that maximum phenol removal by soil occurred at

solution pH 6.0. [36]-[38]. The study revealed that the

increased removal percentage with increase of initial phenol

concentrations from 0.5 to 4 mg/L, accomplishing the

maximum removal (95.30 %) at an initial concentration of 4

mg/L and then found to be decreased marginally beyond it

towards the initial phenol concentration of 10 mg/L. As the

initial concentrations of phenol increases, the higher amount

of phenol was adsorbed on the surface of adsorbent due to

higher concentration gradient, depending on active available

sites according to its uptake capacity as well as the presence

of amount of organic carbon in soil. The descending trend was

obtained because of lesser diffusion and binding on the top of

the soil surface due to exhaustion of active sites and for which

reducing effect of phenol observation was noticed. Similar

finding was reported earlier by Kiran and Chandrajit [39].

The maximum phenol uptake capacity of the soil was found

472.5 mg/kg. Due to this reasonable uptake and attenuation

capacity of the studied soil, it can be considered as a primary

landfill liner for containment of phenolic waste in waste

disposal sites.

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

0.5 1 2 4 6 10

Initial phenol concentration (mg/L)

Ph

en

ol rem

oval (%

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Ph

en

ol

up

tak

e c

ap

acit

y q

e

(mg

/g)

Removal (%)

Uptake capacity (mg/g)

Fig. 4. Phenol removal percentage and uptake capacity as a function of initial

phenol concentrations of the solution at adsorbent dose=20 g/L, pH=6.0 and

contact time=24 hours. Vertical bars show standard deviation of three

replicates.

IV. CONCLUSION

1) Silty clay occurring in the Gangetic river basin near

Kolkata, West Bengal are suitable as landfill liner

materials for containment of phenolic wastewater

generated from the phenol wastewater releasing industry.

2) The clays from the Gangetic river basin contain more

than 40% of clay fraction and not more than 20% sand

with 3.65% organic carbon content. According the liquid

limit value (39%) and plasticity index (14%), these clays

corresponds to CI (inorganic clay with intermediate

plasticity) category.

3) The high shrinkage limit (20.67>12%) and low activity

(<0.75) values of the clay materials not only reduces the

chances of desiccation cracks in the dry season but also

minimizes undesirable behavior such as higher

compressibility, swelling and shrinkage characteristics

and more likely affected by contaminants if used as liner

materials in containment structures. The vertical swelling


898

potential of the clay soil was about 6.26 % which is

considered as low to moderate.

4) The relationship between permeability and compaction

parameters exhibit that the lowest permeability

(1.90×10-8

cm/s) was achieved at wet side of optimum

water content (19%) and which is well below the

standard acceptable limit suggested by waste regulatory

bodies for landfill liners to retard the subsurface

migration of the contaminants. However, during

construction of liner, the compaction of soil at higher

water content causes slope instability due to lower shear

strength as well as operational problems with

construction equipments on soft weak soil. Hence,

judicial selection of water content to compact the soil in

the field is very important. In case of present soil, water

content marginally dry side of the optimum may be

chosen for the abovementioned purpose without negating

the permeability requirements.

5) The adequate strength, good phenol attenuation capacity

(472 mg/g), low susceptibility to shrinkage and swelling

in addition to large areal extent of availability at

reasonable hauling distance can make these soils as

potential materials for compacted soil liners in waste

containment structures. However, further laboratory and

field testing should be conducted before accepting its

potentiality to restrict the migration of contaminants.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors are thankful to the Director, National Institute

of Technology Durgapur-713209, West Bengal, INDIA for

providing necessary assistance for carrying out the present

research.

REFERENCES

[1] I. Bozbey and E. Guler, “Laboratory and field testing for utilization of

an excavated soil as landfill liner material,” Waste Manag., vol. 26, pp.

1277-1286, 2006.

[2] R. Cossu, “Groundwater contamination from landfill leachate: when

appearances are deceiving!” Waste Manag., vol. 33, pp. 1793–1794,

2013

[3] J. Cuevas, A. I. Ruiz, I. S. de Soto, T. Sevilla, J. R. Procopio, P. D.

Silva, M. J. Gismera, M. Regadío, N. S. Jiménez, M. Rodríguez

Rastrero, and S. Leguey, “The performance of natural clay as a barrier

to the diffusion of municipal solid waste landfill leachates,” J. Environ.

Manag., vol. 95 , pp. S175–S181, 2012.

[4] D. E. Daniel, Geotechnical Practice for Waste Disposal, Chapman &

Hall, 1993.

[5] Y. E. A. Mohamedzein, A. A. Al-Rawas, M. Y. Al-Aghbari, A. Qatan,

and A. H. Al-Rawas, “Assessment of crushed shales for use as

compacted landfill liners,” Engineering Geology, vol. 80, pp. 271-281,

2005.

[6] I. Ghorbel-Abid and M. Trabelsi-Ayadi, “Competitive adsorption of

heavy metals on local landfill clay,” Arab. J. Chem., 2011.

[7] N. Sánchez-Jiménez, M. J. Gismera, M. T. Sevilla, J. Cuevas, M.

Rodríguez-Rastrero, and J. R. Procopio, “Clayey materials as geologic

barrier in urban landfills: comprehensive study of the interaction of

selected quarry materials with heavy metals,” Appl. Clay Sci., vol. 56,

pp. 23–29, 2012.

[8] Z. Li, Q. Xue, T. Katsumi, and T. Inui, “Electric-hydraulic-chemical

coupled modeling of solute transport through landfill clay liners,”

Appl. Clay Sci., vol. 101, pp. 541–552, 2014.

[9] T. Chalermyanont, S. Arrykul, and N. Charoenthaisong, “Potential use

of lateritic and marine clay soils as landfill liners to retain heavy

metals,” Waste Manag., vol. 29, pp. 117-127, 2009.

[10] F. M. Fransisca and D. A. Glatstein, “Long term hydraulic conductivity

of compacted soils permeated with landfill leachate,” Appl. Clay Sci.,

vol. 49, pp.187–193, 2010.

[11] Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater,

American Public Health Association (APHA), Washington DC, 2005.

[12] S. Pal, K. Adhikari, S. Ghosh, and S. N. Mukherjee, “Characterization

of subsurface water near an industrial wastewater disposal site,” Inter.

J. Earth Sci. Eng., vol. 04, no. 06, pp. 437–441, 2011.

[13] Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality: Health Criteria & Other

Supporting Information, 2nd ed, vol. 2, World Health Organization,

Geneva, 1997.

[14] Methods of Test for Soils: Preparation of Dry Soil Samples for

Various Tests, IS 2720, Part 1, 1983.

[15] Methods of Test for Soils: Determination of Water Content, IS 2720,

Part 2, 1973.

[16] Test for Soils: Determination of Specific Gravity — Section 2: Fine,

Medium and Coarse Grained Soils, IS 2720, Part III, 1980.

[17] Methods of Test for Soils: Grain Size Analysis, IS 2720, Part 4, 1985.

[18] Method of Test for Soils: Determination of Liquid and Plastic Limit, IS

2720, Part 5, 1985.

[19] Methods of Test for Soils: Determination of Organic Matter, IS 2720,

Part 22, 1972.

[20] Method of Test for Soils: Determination of pH Value, IS 2720, Part 26,

1987.

[21] Methods of Test for Soils: Laboratory Determination of Permeability,

IS 2720, Part 17, 1986.

[22] Determination of Shear Strength Parameters of Soil from

Consolidated Undrained Triaxial Compression Test with

Measurement of Pore Water Pressure, IS 2720, Part 12, 1981.

[23] Measurement of Swelling Pressure of Soils, IS 2720, Part 41, 1977.

[24] Classification and Identification of Soils for General Engineering

Purposes, IS 1498–1970, 2002.

[25] P. V. Sivapullaiah, H. Lakshmikantha, and K. K. Madhu,

“Geotechnical properties of stabilized Indian red earth,” Geotechnical

and Geological Engineering, vol. 21, pp. 399-413, 2003.

[26] M. R. Taha and M. H. Kabir, “Tropical residual soil as compacted soil

liners,” Environ. Geol., vol. 47, pp. 375-381, 2005.

[27] A. W. Skempton, “The colloidal activity of clays,” in Proc. the Third

International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation

Engineering, 1953, vol. 1, pp. 57-61.

[28] I. S. Oweis and R. P. Khera, Geotechnology of Waste Management, 2nd

ed, PWS Publishing Company, USA, 1998, p. 472.

[29] D. E. Daniel and Y. K. Wu, “Compacted clay liners and covers for arid

sites,” J. Geotech. Eng. ASCE, vol. 119, no. 2, pp. 223-237, 1993.

[30] R. K. Rowe, R. M. Quigley, and J. R. Booker, Clayey Barrier Systems

for Waste Disposal Facilities, E & FN Spon Lond, 1995, p. 390.

[31] C. H. Benson and D. E. Daniel, “Influence of clods on hydraulic

conductivity of compacted clay,” J. Geotech. Engg. ASCE, vol. 116,

no. 8, pp. 1231-1248, 1990.

[32] C. Sheu, T. T. Lin, J. E. Chang, and C. H. Cheng, “The feasibility of

mudstone material as natural landfill liner,” J. Hazard. Mater., vol. 58,

pp. 237-247, 1998.

[33] C. H. Benson and J. M. Trast, “Hydraulic conductivity of thirteen

compacted clays,” Clays Clay Min., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 669-681, 1995.

[34] E. D. McBean, F. A. Rovers, and G. J. Farquhar, Solid Waste Landfill

Engineering and Design, Prentice Hall PTR, New Jersey, 1995, p. 521.

[35] T. W. Lambe and R. V. Whitman, Soil Mechanics, John Wiley and

Sons, Inc., 1969.

[36] S. Pal, S. N. Mukherjee, and S. Ghosh, “Application of Hydrus 1D

model for assessment of phenol–soil adsorption dynamics,” Environ.

Sci. Pollut. Res., 2014.

[37] T. Viraraghavan and F. M. Alfaro, “Adsorption of phenol from

wastewater by peat, fly ash and bentonite,” J. Hazard. Mater., vol. 57,

pp. 59-70, 1998.

[38] M. Djebbar, F. Djafri, M. Bouchekara, and A. Djafri, “Adsorption of

phenol on natural clay,” Appl. Water Sci., vol. 02, no. 02, pp. 77-86,

2012.

[39] V. R. Kiran and B. Chandrajit, “Simultaneous adsorptive removal of

cyanide and phenol from industrial wastewater: optimization of

process parameters,” Res. J. Chem. Sci., vol. 01, no. 4, pp. 30-39,

2011.

Supriya Pal was born on April 7, 1978 in Mankar,

Burdwan, West Bengal, India. He graduated from the

Department of Civil Engineering, North Bengal

University in 2000 and received the master degree of

civil engineering in 2002 from Jadavpur University.

He is currently an assistant professor at National

Institute of Technology Durgapur, Department of Civil

Engineering. He has 7 years’ teaching and research

experience in the fields of geotechnical and geo-environmental engineering


899

and 5 years’ industrial experience. His research spans are solute transport

through porous media, landfill liner design, ground improvement and

electrokinetic remediation of contaminated sites. He has directed and

supervised numerous research studies and projects in the field of

geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering.

He also has 12 research publications in reputed national and international

journals and conference proceedings.

Kalyan Adhikari received the M.Sc. degree in 1991

and the Ph.D degree in 2003 both from the University of

Burdwan, West Bengal, India.

He is currently an associate professor at National

Institute of Technology Durgapur, Department of Earth

and Environmental Studies. His research spans are

groundwater occurrence, quality, subsurface migration

of contaminants and remedies, contaminant removal by

natural adsorbents, application of RS and GIS in Geoscience. He has

published 25 technical papers in reputed national and international journals

as well as conference proceedings.

Somnath Mukherjee is a professor in the Department

of Civil Engineering at the Jadavpur University,

Kolkata, India. He holds a M.Tech. degree from IIT,

Kharagpur for his work on ‘emulsified oily wastewater’

and a Ph.D degree from IIT, Kharagpur for the thesis

with title “COD removal and denitrification in upflow

anaerobic fixed film reactor”. His major fields of

interest span environmental engineering and

geo-environmental engineering with specific research work undertaken in

biological treatment of wastewater, adsorption technology for water

treatment and pollutant migration through soil and ground water.

He reckons 25 years’ research experience, 22 years’ teaching experience

in civil and environmental engineering and 8 years’ industrial experience in

project management and consultancy. He also has 75 journal publications

and a total of 55 papers presented and published in proceedings of national

and international conferences.

Sudipta Ghosh is a professor in the Department of

Civil Engineering at the Jadavpur University, Kolkata,

India. He holds a master degree of civil engineering and

a Ph.D degree from Jadavpur University, Kolkata. His

major fields of interest span geotechnical and

geo-environmental engineering with specific research

work undertaken in pollutant migration through soil

and ground water.

He reckons 20 years’ teaching and research experience in civil and

geo-environmental engineering and 12 years’ industrial experience. He also

has 55 research publications in reputed national and international journals

and conference proceedings.


900

Potential of Silty Clay Soil as an Attenuation Material ... · Somnath Mukherjee and Sudipta Ghosh are with the Civil Engineering Department, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, West Bengal,

Documents